Go to page

Go to page

Moderator

I should have written "RU 15's type & frequency of" - after my "no" in "no... scrums, lineouts etc". RU 7's has been designed as a much more free flowing, ball in hand game, with less emphasis on scrums & lineouts. RU 7's have much fewer players, also, involved in their scrum & lineout.

Scrums and lineouts are still important set pieces in sevens. Tactics for them in sevens are more and more finding their way over to the 15 a side game. So the idea that their is less emphasis on scrums and lineouts in sevens is just a wrong idea to have and shows a lack of knowledge for the code in general. As for the game having being designed as a more free flowing, ball in hand game thats just not true. It was designed to develop the the defensive skills of local Melrose players in the Borders region of Scotland, the game as we know it was a byproduct of that as more nations took up Sevens and Rugby, but it was not what they set out to develop.

I never said RU 7's was a new sport -I was aware RU 7's has been played for a very long time. In recent times, however, it has been given more emphasis by RU orgs. & become more popular (now an Olympic sport) -to attract people to a more free flowing game who might not like the inscrutability of the Rules, & incessant stoppages/scrums/lineouts/mauls etc of RU 15's.

The 1970's aren't recent times, thats when the wider International push outside Rugby's traditional areas started, with the Hong Kong Sevens considered the unofficial World Cup before the Rugby World Cup came into being in 1987. Also Rugby was an Olympic Sport before 2016, with it being seen as a return not an entry of a new sport, but hey pesky facts.

The force applied in a RU 15 scrum is much greater than a RU 7 scrum, & the strength required for lifting a player in the RU 15 lineout is greater cf RU 7's.
The typical RU 7 player is a "lightweight" cf his RU 15 counterpart. RU 7's is a much greater running game, requiring greater fitness ie much less requirement for brute strength.

Sure less players in a scrum means less force, but more lightweight players doesn't mean lifting is any easy thats just poor logic and shows a lacks of knowledge of how lineouts work in the 15 a side game, before we even get to Sevens. But the fitness point is the one that makes me laugh. Sure there are differences but the way you think the 15 a side game works is so out of place in todays game, that it was left behind in the 1980's. Brute Strength gets you no where.

Premiership Player

Scrums and lineouts are still important set pieces in sevens. Tactics for them in sevens are more and more finding their way over to the 15 a side game. So the idea that their is less emphasis on scrums and lineouts in sevens is just a wrong idea to have and shows a lack of knowledge for the code in general. As for the game having being designed as a more free flowing, ball in hand game thats just not true. It was designed to develop the the defensive skills of local Melrose players in the Borders region of Scotland, the game as we know it was a byproduct of that as more nations took up Sevens and Rugby, but it was not what they set out to develop.

The 1970's aren't recent times, thats when the wider International push outside Rugby's traditional areas started, with the Hong Kong Sevens considered the unofficial World Cup before the Rugby World Cup came into being in 1987. Also Rugby was an Olympic Sport before 2016, with it being seen as a return not an entry of a new sport, but hey pesky facts.

Sure less players in a scrum means less force, but more lightweight players doesn't mean lifting is any easy thats just poor logic and shows a lacks of knowledge of how lineouts work in the 15 a side game, before we even get to Sevens. But the fitness point is the one that makes me laugh. Sure there are differences but the way you think the 15 a side game works is so out of place in todays game, that it was left behind in the 1980's. Brute Strength gets you no where.

I think, notwithstanding that the rules of 7s are fundamentally the same, the forward play in rugby union is substantially altered from traditional 15s

Anyway, I think that rugby 7s, far more than any other sport, is where the AFL gets inspiration from for AFLX.

The key difference is rugby 7s plays on the same sized pitch, where as AFLX player numbers are approximately proportionate to the reduction in field size with the implication that AFLX will more resemble the traditional form in terms of the critical influence of time and space.

Beyond that it seems to me it is precisely modeled on rugby 7s.

-primarily based on a reduction in player numbers

-carnival type tournament structure

-significant reduction in the complex and harder to grasp aspects of the game (in rugby primarily forward play where mauls are a non entity and rucks and scrums are both far more easy to follow...in the AFL, to be seen, but I suspect far less stoppages and people at them and obviously no 18 man zones and presses etc)

What definitely can be said about 7s is that it is very much complementary to the traditional 15s game and certainly only enhances its growth rather than detracts from it. It provides entry level to the more technical/complex parts of the game (i.e. forward play). Despite being at least ~45 years at an elite level it has certainly not affected 15s being the first choice for pretty much all elite rugby players

The BBL comparisons I suspect are a PR exercise where the game's heartlands would be much more familiar than rugby 7s.

Anyway, I'm increasingly looking forward to it and am very positive about where it will end up.

Moderator

I think, notwithstanding that the rules of 7s are fundamentally the same, the forward play in rugby union is substantially altered from traditional 15s

Anyway, I think that rugby 7s, far more than any other sport, is where the AFL gets inspiration from for AFLX.

The key difference is rugby 7s plays on the same sized pitch, where as AFLX player numbers are approximately proportionate to the reduction in field size with the implication that AFLX will more resemble the traditional form in terms of the critical influence of time and space.

Beyond that it seems to me it is precisely modeled on rugby 7s.

-primarily based on a reduction in player numbers

-carnival type tournament structure

-significant reduction in the complex and harder to grasp aspects of the game (in rugby primarily forward play where mauls are a non entity and rucks and scrums are both far more easy to follow...in the AFL, to be seen, but I suspect far less stoppages and people at them and obviously no 18 man zones and presses etc)

What definitely can be said about 7s is that it is very much complementary to the traditional 15s game and certainly only enhances its growth rather than detracts from it. It provides entry level to the more technical/complex parts of the game (i.e. forward play). Despite being at least ~45 years at an elite level it has certainly not affected 15s being the first choice for pretty much all elite rugby players

The BBL comparisons I suspect are a PR exercise where the game's heartlands would be much more familiar than rugby 7s.

Anyway, I'm increasingly looking forward to it and am very positive about where it will end up.

The complementary aspect will be the interesting thing to look upon going forward and its what I also think the AFL have in mind with the use of AFLX in new markets overseas when looking at the Rugby Sevens copybook. If the AFL get it right they have something they can use to export the code that isn't hard to set up which if successful can see stuff like AFL 9's, Auskick, and eventually 18 a side following when the demand is there.

Premiership Player

Just to paint a picture of one possibility for AFLX, here is a proposed state of origin carnival-tournament

So, should be self explanatory but you basically have an 8 team, two pool round robin with the 7 states and territories (NSW / ACT combined) plus an Irish team (possibly a "world" team for women).

The pool games would be played between 11 and 5 with the finals from 7 to 10 (semis for the top 2 in each group and then the place play off games progressing to the GF)

You could play the tournament three times over three saturdays in from middle to late november (ie when the international rules was played)..

the two hour gap between the round games and the final is designed to allow for two types of tickets to be sold. Are GA ticket for the round games and than premium for the evening session...the assumption here is that many of the best players would be playing

Brownlow Medallist

Ha, well there would be plenty of footy fans willing to call it a terrible idea, but something similar could actually work. Not sure of the exact format, or how often, etc, but with each team only needing a squad of some 12 or so players, you can see how Ireland could actually put a team in and be competitive.

Premiership Player

Ha, well there would be plenty of footy fans willing to call it a terrible idea, but something similar could actually work. Not sure of the exact format, or how often, etc, but with each team only needing a squad of some 12 or so players, you can see how Ireland could actually put a team in and be competitive.

The lesson from rugby 7s is that "competitive imbalance" is less of an interest killer in faster short form games that are over in 20 minutes / half an hour.

That said, while there would be blow outs, there would also be a greater chance of teams from states with smaller grass roots producing teams that could knock over, say, Vic and WA as it is the depth that is generally the killer

The lesson from rugby 7s is that "competitive imbalance" is less of an interest killer in faster short form games that are over in 20 minutes / half an hour.

That said, while there would be blow outs, there would also be a greater chance of teams from states with smaller grass roots producing teams that could knock over, say, Vic and WA as it is the depth that is generally the killer

Agreed, not to mention, that this version of the game would suit pacey outfits like that of the NT and the Irish - it would be a a lot different to full 18-a-side (once again, the 7s experience is instructive here).

Brownlow Medallist

A lot of people will tune in and watch their team play the single game they have out of a combination of curiosity and missing the game.

The AFL will trumpet these ratings (and carefully selected comments) to claim the game is a huge success and use this to ramp the game up for future use, completely ignoring that a great many of those who watched wouldn't have bothered to watch a second game if there had been one.

Club Legend

My prediction for AFLX.
A lot of people will tune in and watch their team play the single game they have out of a combination of curiosity and missing the game.
The AFL will trumpet these ratings (and carefully selected comments) to claim the game is a huge success and use this to ramp the game up for future use, completely ignoring that a great many of those who watched WOULDN'T[?] have bothered to watch a second game if there had been one.

How can one realistically predict now (& after the -initially ridiculed- BBL juggernaut) that there will not be an ongoing, strong interest in AFLX in Aust. -particularly if it is played in a free flowing, limited stoppages, high scoring style (which appears to be the rationale behind its Rules)?
One should not forget that one of the greatest appeals of the VFA (which is not disputed) is that they played 16-a-side (no wings). The VFA wisely understood that it needed a Point Of Difference to the more skilled VFL; & that AF fans preferred a generally more free flowing game, more action, & less stoppages.

IMO, AFLX will be a success due to its Point Of Difference:-
. Rules
. action packed & more one-on-one contests
. played in the offseason
. played on rectangular, smaller soccer/rugby grounds -this will add to its curiosity factor & charm.
(The AFL also knows AFLX will assist in growing AF in NSW & Qld.'s rectangular grounds -delicious irony!)

Fans cant get enough of "footy" in the off season. This has been clearly demonstrated by the huge success of the AFLW (& even FoxFooty channel broadcasts 365 days pa). It will be the AFL's aperitif.
The AFL has cleverly positioned AFLX to also be played overseas, where large oval grounds generally don't exist. If the AFL can attract the interest of 0.25 - 1% of the market in China, India, USA, Europe etc, it will be a significant triumph -potentially, in 20 years+, opening up more broadcast rights for the proper AFL season/more players etc.

You can't. But imagine if you've spent 12 months canning a concept you haven't even seen in action and it's now only a month away from going live? well you might just start crafting a little weasel hole to weasel out of if it's actually popular...

Anyway, my prediction is that it will be somewhere between a qualified or an unbridled success, those that have weirdly way over invested in it failing will insist it did....and then the dogs will keep barking but the caravan will move on

Club Legend

Some rare video of an AFL team playing AFLX.
NMFC's S. Higgins said "...its very continuous...I love it...its good fun...its really good fitness work this time of year...".

Like RU 7's, it is a continuous, freeflowing game, with limited stoppages - requiring very high degrees of fitness. For some amateur players overseas (where fitness levels vary considerably) playing only 7-a-side on a soccer pitch, they may find the high level of fitness (reqd. to be competitive) exhausting; & may be a negative for AF.

Club Legend

. "He (ie S.Hocking, new Head Of Football Operations -my words) feels like he is a revolutionist, he will make HUGE (my emphasis) changes. He has a mandate to make the changes he wants, I will back him in...but the Commission has the final say". This was a response to Whateley's question to McLachlan "Is Steve Hosking a revolutionist or evolutionist?" McLachlan did not specify what "huge changes" Hocking will make in the future (but did say he re-organized the MRP).

. "AFLX started as a solution to a facilities problem but, like the AFLW, it allows us to talk to broader markets. AFLX is focused on families, kids and millenials. There will be music, it will be very different, as we are drawing on basketball, beach volleyball, rugby 7's, and the BBL".

Major public support for the 199 game Back Pocket Player, Hocking, from the boss!